I guess revenge is a meal best served cold! Good for Apple, they turned an unfair and selective PR campaign in their favor.
I remember not long ago GP would send out people to the streets to protest against Apple and do nothing with regards to other computer companies.
It may be unfair that they singled out Apple for protests, but there is a smart strategic reason they did this, imo: because Apple is perceived as the company most able to set a trend for the rest of the entire industry, and probably the one most likely to respond when challenged to be innovative. In a perverse way, it's kind of compliment that Greenpeace targeted Apple.
Also, just a hypothesis, but perhaps Steve Jobs took this issue personally. I mean, the toxics that Apple has now removed are considered carcinogens....
After falling prey to harsh criticism from Greenpeace over its use of toxic chemicals in products for years on end, Apple was honored this week with the environmental advocacy group's top ranking as the greenest electronics maker.
Receiving a favorable recognition from a terrorist group isn't exactly an honor.
I wonder who GP's next target will be now that things are all warm & fuzzy with Apple.
Greenpeace would be a far more effective organization if they formed partnerships to inform and reward companies that are moving in the right direction, instead of being a bunch of militants. Then again, I'm not actually certain if they have engineers and scientists who advise them.
It seems to me that Greenpeace just did what you think they should do -- they "inform"ed the companies about how they rate, and they "reward"ed Apple and others by lauding their improvements.
As far as I can tell Greenpeace are loud protesters with big signs and they occasionally tresspass and chain themselves to fences, etc., but they have never been offensively violent or militant in my recent memory. Maybe you are confusing them with other more extreme organizations -- they are certainly not all the same: groups include everything from the Sierra club to Earth First -- big difference so don't lump them in all together. I know radio hosts like to call all environmentalists "militant" in their soundbites, but they are wrong.
Greenpeace uses sensationalist, gimmicky methods to draw attention to important issues. This annoys me greatly, but they ARE doing us all a favor in the end. Sad to say, but we live in a society where sound bites and publicity stunts actually matter. So, keep at it, Greenpeace, and good luck! ...Just don’t expect me to take your publicity stunts too seriously.
I’m glad to see a little more reality creeping into their Apple- and computer-related messages.
ALL these companies, Apple included, can use extra pressure on these matters. There’s a LOT more at stake than the “hurt feelings” of major corporations (or their blind fans). But that pressure works a lot better when the GOOD is highlighted, not just the bad. This is a turn for the better!
Same group of people who burn down your house, disable your car, put nails in your trees so you don't cut it down (even if you don't want too) and all other sorts of crazed behavior.
Once they realize a family dog has twice the carbon footprint of a SUV they will come stalk Rover with chocolate and poisoned hamburger.
They are certainly anti-human to say the least. ...
This is not only highly offensive it's 100% wrong.
Greenpeace is a bit of a joke nowadays, but originally they were a respected science organisation with lots of very smart and respectable people involved.
Whatever you feel about them though it's important to note that THEY NEVER DID ANY OF THE THINGS WHICH YOU SO CASUALLY ACCUSE THEM OF ABOVE.
- "EarthFirst" spiked trees and put sugar in gas tanks, not Greenpeace.
- Crazy people might put poison out for dogs, but Greenpeace .... not so much
- "burn down your house" are you serious???
I find your posts somewhat interesting when you're talking about Mac stuff, but when you cross over into the political stuff you not only don't know what you're talking about, you're posts are mean, offensive and selfish.
How do you even live with yourself with attitudes like that? What gives you the right to spew this garbage about things and people you know nothing about?
You should have just pissed on her..the human rights equivalent of blood. They could save a lot of carbon footprint just by killing themselves.
This is just a despicable thing to say. Who do you think you are to suggest assaulting people or encouraging them to suicide in a public forum?
The worst you could say about Greenpeacers is that they are "silly" or "annoying." It's easy to see that there are a lot worse things one could say about you
This is just a despicable thing to say. Who do you think you are to suggest assaulting people or encouraging them to suicide in a public forum?
The worst you could say about Greenpeacers is that they are "silly" or "annoying." It's easy to see that there are a lot worse things one could say about you
True, the last bit was over the top. I'd still piss on one of them if they threatened me however.
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
That WASN'T Greenpeace. Will you take back your comment now? As I pointed out in another post, don't lump all enviro groups as the same -- there are many types, including many peaceful ones. While Greenpeace employs protests and passive resistance, they are not offensively violent as you have said.
You spout on about something you are barely informed about and make all kinds of accusations. Why not say anything on the interwebs, huh?
They are NOT pacifists. They are borderline criminals.
Don't slunk off with your tail between your legs.
Greenpeace creates the same environment that breeds the extreme, much like Islam creates the same environment for terrorists.
The environment that is created is ignorance, intolerance and that it's OK to commit hostile acts in the name of your cause.
Once you cross these lines, your organization, cause or religion looses all credibility.
Steve did what Greenpeace wanted to avoid becoming a victim of eco-terrorism, the Greenpeace announcement is not to inform the public chiefly, but to call off the cells of extremists.
What Greenpeace should do is go after Microsoft, Dell and HP, they are the ones creating disposable PC's and filling landfills with their cheap shoddy goods and higher turnover rates.
Mac's have very low turnover rates and many are resold on eBay and elsewhere to be used again.
But as usual with extremists, they think emotionally and not logically.
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
I once got into a doorstep debate with a GreenPeace representative over their specific treatment of Apple and he had no comeback at all. It was awesome because he wasn't prepared for me.
The quicker GreenPeace leave and stop messing it all up for everyone and leave it to the more astute protestors the better the world will be because clearly the aggressive stance doesn't work, it only causes the victim's back to arch and they fight back as was the case with the Japanese security boat ramming GreenPeace's boat.
I would like to see numbers on GreenPeace's carbon footprint before I listen to those hypocrites.
A) It was the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society with Paul Watson, not Greenpeace (the latter have refused to engage with this tactic). And by the way, Watson hates Greenpeace for not being "radical enough."
Be a man and decide 1) whether you don't support Japan's "whaling crap" enough to do something about it yourself or 2) do support whaling enough to do something about Watson & Co. B
C) Greenpeace are more like a political party than any "terrorist" group. I don't recall these guys flying planes into buildings or killing anyone, ever. Some of the campaigns they have I totally agree with, others I totally don't.
D) From the above (viz. you don't even know who/what Greenpeace are/do) I doubt you were well prepared enough to win a debate with anyone. Whoever was unlucky enough to hear your version of the facts was probably just gobsmacked by your ignorance or trying to bite their tongue to stop from laughing in your face.
E) Do I support everything Greenpeace does or how they do it? Not at all. But at least they try to do some good things and that's better than sitting around being an armchair know-it-all. Good on them, and good on Apple, for trying to to make a tiny difference in a big world, and shame on you for thinking you have any kind moral high ground when you can't even get your facts straight. Talk about "hypocrites.\" And no, I am not now nor have I ever been a member... Peace out.
Yea, don't slunk off with your tail between your legs.
Greenpeace creates the same environment that breeds the extreme, much like Islam creates the same environment for terrorists.
The environment that is created is that it's OK to commit hostile acts in the name of your cause.
Once you cross this line, your organization or religion looses all credibility.
Hardly slunking. I could give a shit if every member of greenpeace up and died. I wouldn't lose a bit of sleep. Although I agree with their goals, they are absolutely not pacifists no matter how much they may claim that. They basically incite violence or do their damnedest to do so. They could use other methods that aren't so prone to incite violence.
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
I once got into a doorstep debate with a GreenPeace representative over their specific treatment of Apple and he had no comeback at all. It was awesome because he wasn't prepared for me.
The quicker GreenPeace leave and stop messing it all up for everyone and leave it to the more astute protestors the better the world will be because clearly the aggressive stance doesn't work, it only causes the victim's back to arch and they fight back as was the case with the Japanese security boat ramming GreenPeace's boat.
I would like to see numbers on GreenPeace's carbon footprint before I listen to those hypocrites.
It wasn't a Greenpeace ship - but then, why let that interfere with a rant.
They are NOT pacifists. They are borderline criminals.
Wow. I thought Apple users were supposed to be a bit more on the ball. Have Greenpeace crossed legal lines? Yes, many times and so I guess that that technically that makes them actual rather than "borderline" criminals. But so have lots of people who want to challenge laws, from Gandhi to MLK to the lone Chinese guy who stood in front of PLA tanks in Tienanman Square to the Fathers of the American Revolution. So what? And dude, seriously, grab the nearest dictionary and look up "pacifist". The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh. I've lived in Saudi Arabia and have worked in the Arabian Gulf; these posters—no offense— don't have a clue what they're talking about. Apostasy is NOT a capital crime in Greenpeace.
They are NOT pacifists. They are borderline criminals.
My friend in the RCMP (Canadian Feds) arrested some Greenpeacers for crawling all over the machinery at an oil site.
It was waaaay north of Edmonton, and the funny thing is they all rented big trucks (that burn gas, and use oil by the way) to drive all the way up there (at 20 mpg) to tell them to shut down their operation.
Its like they are TRYING to be completely ironic and idiotic.
edit: they also flew in some "big names" from around the world and caused the police to drive up there to arrest them, as well as taking up police resources because they all stayed over night. Ridiculous hypocrisy.
Wow. I thought Apple users were supposed to be a bit more on the ball. Have Greenpeace crossed legal lines? Yes, many times and so I guess that that technically that makes them actual rather than "borderline" criminals. But so have lots of people who want to challenge laws, from Gandhi to MLK to the fathers of the American Revolution. So what? And dude, seriously, grab the nearest dictionary and look up "pacifist". The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh. I've lived in Saudi Arabia and have worked in the Arabian Gulf; these posters?no offense? don't have a clue what they're talking about. Apostasy is NOT a capital crime in Greenpeace.
I don't believe I ever called them jihadist terrorists. Please point out the relevant post. I called them borderline criminals. They have been arrested numerous times, and put lives at risk.
They could pursue their goals without inciting violence.
Hardly slunking. I could give a shit if every member of greenpeace up and died. I wouldn't lose a bit of sleep. Although I agree with their goals, they are absolutely not pacifists no matter how much they may claim that. They basically incite violence or do their damnedest to do so. They could use other methods that aren't so prone to incite violence.
Comments
I guess revenge is a meal best served cold! Good for Apple, they turned an unfair and selective PR campaign in their favor.
I remember not long ago GP would send out people to the streets to protest against Apple and do nothing with regards to other computer companies.
It may be unfair that they singled out Apple for protests, but there is a smart strategic reason they did this, imo: because Apple is perceived as the company most able to set a trend for the rest of the entire industry, and probably the one most likely to respond when challenged to be innovative. In a perverse way, it's kind of compliment that Greenpeace targeted Apple.
Also, just a hypothesis, but perhaps Steve Jobs took this issue personally. I mean, the toxics that Apple has now removed are considered carcinogens....
E.g. use of identical components to competitor's products.
BTW critical commentary is not trolling.
Coming into a forum and making bold statements without a shred of evidence to back it up is trolling. It's just a drive-by comment.
You second statement at least had a little more meat in it, albeit sans any facts to back up those statements either.
Originally Posted by Azathoth View Post
So how much did Apple pay Greenpeace for this total media BJ?
Really?
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Not true.
The boat belong to Sea Shepherd. http://www.seashepherd.org/
Sea Shepherd broke away from Greenpeace years ago because they felt that Greenpeace had lost sight of the mission/goal.
After falling prey to harsh criticism from Greenpeace over its use of toxic chemicals in products for years on end, Apple was honored this week with the environmental advocacy group's top ranking as the greenest electronics maker.
Receiving a favorable recognition from a terrorist group isn't exactly an honor.
I wonder who GP's next target will be now that things are all warm & fuzzy with Apple.
Greenpeace would be a far more effective organization if they formed partnerships to inform and reward companies that are moving in the right direction, instead of being a bunch of militants. Then again, I'm not actually certain if they have engineers and scientists who advise them.
It seems to me that Greenpeace just did what you think they should do -- they "inform"ed the companies about how they rate, and they "reward"ed Apple and others by lauding their improvements.
As far as I can tell Greenpeace are loud protesters with big signs and they occasionally tresspass and chain themselves to fences, etc., but they have never been offensively violent or militant in my recent memory. Maybe you are confusing them with other more extreme organizations -- they are certainly not all the same: groups include everything from the Sierra club to Earth First -- big difference so don't lump them in all together. I know radio hosts like to call all environmentalists "militant" in their soundbites, but they are wrong.
I’m glad to see a little more reality creeping into their Apple- and computer-related messages.
ALL these companies, Apple included, can use extra pressure on these matters. There’s a LOT more at stake than the “hurt feelings” of major corporations (or their blind fans). But that pressure works a lot better when the GOOD is highlighted, not just the bad. This is a turn for the better!
Eco-terrorists is what they are.
Same group of people who burn down your house, disable your car, put nails in your trees so you don't cut it down (even if you don't want too) and all other sorts of crazed behavior.
Once they realize a family dog has twice the carbon footprint of a SUV they will come stalk Rover with chocolate and poisoned hamburger.
They are certainly anti-human to say the least. ...
This is not only highly offensive it's 100% wrong.
Greenpeace is a bit of a joke nowadays, but originally they were a respected science organisation with lots of very smart and respectable people involved.
Whatever you feel about them though it's important to note that THEY NEVER DID ANY OF THE THINGS WHICH YOU SO CASUALLY ACCUSE THEM OF ABOVE.
- "EarthFirst" spiked trees and put sugar in gas tanks, not Greenpeace.
- Crazy people might put poison out for dogs, but Greenpeace .... not so much
- "burn down your house" are you serious???
I find your posts somewhat interesting when you're talking about Mac stuff, but when you cross over into the political stuff you not only don't know what you're talking about, you're posts are mean, offensive and selfish.
How do you even live with yourself with attitudes like that? What gives you the right to spew this garbage about things and people you know nothing about?
You should have just pissed on her..the human rights equivalent of blood. They could save a lot of carbon footprint just by killing themselves.
This is just a despicable thing to say. Who do you think you are to suggest assaulting people or encouraging them to suicide in a public forum?
The worst you could say about Greenpeacers is that they are "silly" or "annoying." It's easy to see that there are a lot worse things one could say about you
This is just a despicable thing to say. Who do you think you are to suggest assaulting people or encouraging them to suicide in a public forum?
The worst you could say about Greenpeacers is that they are "silly" or "annoying." It's easy to see that there are a lot worse things one could say about you
True, the last bit was over the top. I'd still piss on one of them if they threatened me however.
http://www.highnorth.no/Library/Move...e/gr-ac-pr.htm
They are NOT pacifists. They are borderline criminals.
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
That WASN'T Greenpeace. Will you take back your comment now? As I pointed out in another post, don't lump all enviro groups as the same -- there are many types, including many peaceful ones. While Greenpeace employs protests and passive resistance, they are not offensively violent as you have said.
You spout on about something you are barely informed about and make all kinds of accusations. Why not say anything on the interwebs, huh?
True, the last bit was over the top. I'd still piss on one of them if they threatened me however.
http://www.highnorth.no/Library/Move...e/gr-ac-pr.htm
They are NOT pacifists. They are borderline criminals.
Don't slunk off with your tail between your legs.
Greenpeace creates the same environment that breeds the extreme, much like Islam creates the same environment for terrorists.
The environment that is created is ignorance, intolerance and that it's OK to commit hostile acts in the name of your cause.
Once you cross these lines, your organization, cause or religion looses all credibility.
Steve did what Greenpeace wanted to avoid becoming a victim of eco-terrorism, the Greenpeace announcement is not to inform the public chiefly, but to call off the cells of extremists.
What Greenpeace should do is go after Microsoft, Dell and HP, they are the ones creating disposable PC's and filling landfills with their cheap shoddy goods and higher turnover rates.
Mac's have very low turnover rates and many are resold on eBay and elsewhere to be used again.
But as usual with extremists, they think emotionally and not logically.
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
I once got into a doorstep debate with a GreenPeace representative over their specific treatment of Apple and he had no comeback at all. It was awesome because he wasn't prepared for me.
The quicker GreenPeace leave and stop messing it all up for everyone and leave it to the more astute protestors the better the world will be because clearly the aggressive stance doesn't work, it only causes the victim's back to arch and they fight back as was the case with the Japanese security boat ramming GreenPeace's boat.
I would like to see numbers on GreenPeace's carbon footprint before I listen to those hypocrites.
A) It was the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society with Paul Watson, not Greenpeace (the latter have refused to engage with this tactic). And by the way, Watson hates Greenpeace for not being "radical enough."
C) Greenpeace are more like a political party than any "terrorist" group. I don't recall these guys flying planes into buildings or killing anyone, ever. Some of the campaigns they have I totally agree with, others I totally don't.
D) From the above (viz. you don't even know who/what Greenpeace are/do) I doubt you were well prepared enough to win a debate with anyone. Whoever was unlucky enough to hear your version of the facts was probably just gobsmacked by your ignorance or trying to bite their tongue to stop from laughing in your face.
E) Do I support everything Greenpeace does or how they do it? Not at all. But at least they try to do some good things and that's better than sitting around being an armchair know-it-all. Good on them, and good on Apple, for trying to to make a tiny difference in a big world, and shame on you for thinking you have any kind moral high ground when you can't even get your facts straight. Talk about "hypocrites.
Yea, don't slunk off with your tail between your legs.
Greenpeace creates the same environment that breeds the extreme, much like Islam creates the same environment for terrorists.
The environment that is created is that it's OK to commit hostile acts in the name of your cause.
Once you cross this line, your organization or religion looses all credibility.
Hardly slunking. I could give a shit if every member of greenpeace up and died. I wouldn't lose a bit of sleep. Although I agree with their goals, they are absolutely not pacifists no matter how much they may claim that. They basically incite violence or do their damnedest to do so. They could use other methods that aren't so prone to incite violence.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2000/3vol2.htm
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
I once got into a doorstep debate with a GreenPeace representative over their specific treatment of Apple and he had no comeback at all. It was awesome because he wasn't prepared for me.
The quicker GreenPeace leave and stop messing it all up for everyone and leave it to the more astute protestors the better the world will be because clearly the aggressive stance doesn't work, it only causes the victim's back to arch and they fight back as was the case with the Japanese security boat ramming GreenPeace's boat.
I would like to see numbers on GreenPeace's carbon footprint before I listen to those hypocrites.
It wasn't a Greenpeace ship - but then, why let that interfere with a rant.
True, the last bit was over the top. I'd still piss on one of them if they threatened me however.
http://www.highnorth.no/Library/Move...e/gr-ac-pr.htm
They are NOT pacifists. They are borderline criminals.
Wow. I thought Apple users were supposed to be a bit more on the ball. Have Greenpeace crossed legal lines? Yes, many times and so I guess that that technically that makes them actual rather than "borderline" criminals. But so have lots of people who want to challenge laws, from Gandhi to MLK to the lone Chinese guy who stood in front of PLA tanks in Tienanman Square to the Fathers of the American Revolution. So what? And dude, seriously, grab the nearest dictionary and look up "pacifist". The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh. I've lived in Saudi Arabia and have worked in the Arabian Gulf; these posters—no offense— don't have a clue what they're talking about. Apostasy is NOT a capital crime in Greenpeace.
True, the last bit was over the top. I'd still piss on one of them if they threatened me however.
http://www.highnorth.no/Library/Move...e/gr-ac-pr.htm
They are NOT pacifists. They are borderline criminals.
My friend in the RCMP (Canadian Feds) arrested some Greenpeacers for crawling all over the machinery at an oil site.
It was waaaay north of Edmonton, and the funny thing is they all rented big trucks (that burn gas, and use oil by the way) to drive all the way up there (at 20 mpg) to tell them to shut down their operation.
Its like they are TRYING to be completely ironic and idiotic.
edit: they also flew in some "big names" from around the world and caused the police to drive up there to arrest them, as well as taking up police resources because they all stayed over night. Ridiculous hypocrisy.
Wow. I thought Apple users were supposed to be a bit more on the ball. Have Greenpeace crossed legal lines? Yes, many times and so I guess that that technically that makes them actual rather than "borderline" criminals. But so have lots of people who want to challenge laws, from Gandhi to MLK to the fathers of the American Revolution. So what? And dude, seriously, grab the nearest dictionary and look up "pacifist". The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh. I've lived in Saudi Arabia and have worked in the Arabian Gulf; these posters?no offense? don't have a clue what they're talking about. Apostasy is NOT a capital crime in Greenpeace.
I don't believe I ever called them jihadist terrorists. Please point out the relevant post. I called them borderline criminals. They have been arrested numerous times, and put lives at risk.
They could pursue their goals without inciting violence.
Hardly slunking. I could give a shit if every member of greenpeace up and died. I wouldn't lose a bit of sleep. Although I agree with their goals, they are absolutely not pacifists no matter how much they may claim that. They basically incite violence or do their damnedest to do so. They could use other methods that aren't so prone to incite violence.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2000/3vol2.htm
I agree with you, and they ARE terrorists, in the sense that they cause disturbance, fear and hostile acts.
Which is a definition of a terrorist, one who commits terror. They are much like pirates, which is illegal too.
If a bunch of hostile crazies boarded my boat with my little daughter aboard, I certainly would be afraid and so would she.
I would most likely kill them, dump their bodies over board and sink their boat in self defense.
So what if I rot in jail, my daughter would be safe.
Can you tell us exactly what facts you put in your first post? I mean besides the trolling parts.
Who's trolling now?
Who's trolling now?
Technically both of us as far as that sub-topic goes. Your question is no different than mine